Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Plea to Australian decliners

[waldo000...@gmail.com]

On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 2:08 AM, Steve Bennett  wrote:

> But I think declining the CTs is taking out your resentment on the wrong
> people.
> By not allowing your contributions to be part of OSM, you mostly hurt
> the people for whom we're all doing this: the wider open content
> community, and all the individuals who will benefit in many different
> ways from high quality, open maps.
>
> I signed up to the CTs, not because I agree with the licence change,
> or because I like the way the change was handled, but because I care
> much more the open content we're creating than I care about these
> administrative matters.



On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 5:36 AM, Richard Colless  wrote:
>
>  I'm not taking out any resentment on anybody. I'm simply choosing not to
> participate.


On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 6:52 AM, Richard Colless  wrote:
>
> My reason for declining the new CT's is the disgraceful way that OSM has
> treated mappers



Come on Richard, that sounds exactly like "taking out your resentment" to
me... At least admit it. I am in the same boat as Steve.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Plea to Australian decliners

[Richard Weait]

On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 12:52 AM, Richard Colless  wrote:

> As to your suggestions:
>    My e-mail address has remained the same for the last 15 years or so
>    I run several junk filters, and check their contents for incorrect
> diversions before I delete them
>
> Any other guesses?

Your screen name would help.  The guesses aren't doing much good.  :-)

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Plea to Australian decliners

[Richard Colless]

On 1/04/2012 2:16 PM, Richard Weait wrote:

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 11:36 PM, Richard Colless  wrote:


I'm not taking out any resentment on anybody. I'm simply choosing not to
participate. So don't say that I'm hurting anybody.. I'm quite happy for any
of my data to remain. If someone else chooses to delete it, blame them for
any hurt, not me.

I haven't heard from you regarding your API screen name or
registration email, so I can't provide any details about when LWG
attempted to contact you.  LWG attempted to contact every data
contributor.  Individual mappers have reached out to other local
mappers as well.

I can't guess why you didn't see an email but I'll look into it if
you'd like to find out.  Other mappers have run into the following:

- they don't check that email any more.
- their email changed but they didn't update the contact email at osm.org
- email was received and diverted by a spam filter
- perhaps others that I don't recall at the moment


I'm really not that concerned as to why I didn't receive any e-mails. My 
reason for declining the new CT's is the disgraceful way that OSM has 
treated mappers. I'll put my mapping efforts into somewhere more worthwhile.


As to your suggestions:
My e-mail address has remained the same for the last 15 years or so
I run several junk filters, and check their contents for incorrect 
diversions before I delete them


Any other guesses?

Richard

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Plea to Australian decliners

[Richard Weait]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 11:36 PM, Richard Colless  wrote:

> I'm not taking out any resentment on anybody. I'm simply choosing not to
> participate. So don't say that I'm hurting anybody.. I'm quite happy for any
> of my data to remain. If someone else chooses to delete it, blame them for
> any hurt, not me.

I haven't heard from you regarding your API screen name or
registration email, so I can't provide any details about when LWG
attempted to contact you.  LWG attempted to contact every data
contributor.  Individual mappers have reached out to other local
mappers as well.

I can't guess why you didn't see an email but I'll look into it if
you'd like to find out.  Other mappers have run into the following:

- they don't check that email any more.
- their email changed but they didn't update the contact email at osm.org
- email was received and diverted by a spam filter
- perhaps others that I don't recall at the moment

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Plea to Australian decliners

[Richard Colless]

On 1/04/2012 10:08 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Richard Colless  wrote:

I followed the discussion with much interest, and only decided not to accept
the new CT's when I observed the rudeness with which the objections were
handled. The recent spate of correspondence has done nothing to make me
reconsider.

Hi Richard,
   I think we can all agree that the communications skills of the OSMF,
and senior OSM people, leave much to be desired. Pretty much
everything about the licence changeover was crappy. But I think
declining the CTs is taking out your resentment on the wrong people.
By not allowing your contributions to be part of OSM, you mostly hurt
the people for whom we're all doing this: the wider open content
community, and all the individuals who will benefit in many different
ways from high quality, open maps.
I'm not taking out any resentment on anybody. I'm simply choosing not to 
participate. So don't say that I'm hurting anybody.. I'm quite happy for 
any of my data to remain. If someone else chooses to delete it, blame 
them for any hurt, not me.


Richard


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Plea to Australian decliners

[Steve Bennett]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Richard Colless  wrote:
> I followed the discussion with much interest, and only decided not to accept
> the new CT's when I observed the rudeness with which the objections were
> handled. The recent spate of correspondence has done nothing to make me
> reconsider.

Hi Richard,
  I think we can all agree that the communications skills of the OSMF,
and senior OSM people, leave much to be desired. Pretty much
everything about the licence changeover was crappy. But I think
declining the CTs is taking out your resentment on the wrong people.
By not allowing your contributions to be part of OSM, you mostly hurt
the people for whom we're all doing this: the wider open content
community, and all the individuals who will benefit in many different
ways from high quality, open maps.

I signed up to the CTs, not because I agree with the licence change,
or because I like the way the change was handled, but because I care
much more the open content we're creating than I care about these
administrative matters.

Steve

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Plea to Australian decliners

[Richard Weait]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 6:24 AM, Richard Colless  wrote:
> No!  Wrong!
>
> I've never actually declined at all. I have just never accepted the new
> CT's. I didn't decline because I wasn't asked. From my point of view, there
> wasn't any communication directly with the mappers.

[ ... ]

The intent was to contact every account holder, and we made an effort
to do that.  We do know, with certainty, that some emails bounced
because the address was no longer maintained.  Other email attempts
may have been blocked by spam or other filtering.  I can not say with
certainty why you did not receive email.

If you would like to try to find out why, feel free to contact me (or
Grant) off list with your API screen name, and your registered email
address.

I'm sorry that you feel that you were not contacted.  That wasn't the intent.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Plea to Australian decliners

[Richard Colless]

No!  Wrong!

I've never actually declined at all. I have just never accepted the new 
CT's. I didn't decline because I wasn't asked. From my point of view, 
there wasn't _*any*_ communication directly with the mappers. I knew 
about the changes *only *because I am on the Talk-Au list. OSM never 
contacted me, and until quite late in the story, I didn't even get any 
advice about the change when I logged on to make edits.


I followed the discussion with much interest, and only decided not to 
accept the new CT's when I observed the rudeness with which the 
objections were handled. The recent spate of correspondence has done 
nothing to make me reconsider.


Richard

On 31/03/2012 7:03 PM, Simon Poole wrote:


Richard

while IMHO communications in OSM and out of OSM leave much to desire, 
in the case of the licence change there has been a substantial amount 
of communication to the mappers. The only reason I can see for you 
-not- getting a mail from the OSMF early on, is that you must have 
practically immediately declined when that became possible. And I 
assume the reasoning at that point in time was that as a decliner you 
were already informed about the issues and didn't need the OSMF 
pointing out something you already knew about.


Simon

Am 31.03.2012 04:59, schrieb Richard Colless:
I did decline the new terms. And I was contacted, as I said, just 
once, by someone trying to persuade me to change my mind. My point 
was that OSM never  contacted me to say that a licence change was 
being considered. That is hardly the right way to go about making a 
major change to the system.


I also take issue with this statement:
Declining hurts fellow Australian mappers who have in good faith build
data on-top of your contributions and will leave animosity between our
projects.
Don't try blaming decliners for the hurt to other mappers. If anyone 
built up on my edits, and their work gets deleted as a result, blame 
OSM, not the members who declined.


Richard


On 31/03/2012 12:36 PM, Ian Sergeant wrote:

Hi Richard,

Like or loathe the licence change, and the manner it has been 
pursued, sure.  But I really don't think anyone in OSM has tried to 
keep the knowledge of the licence change quiet.  I think a fair few 
people have been trying to get in touch with as many people as possible.


I've personally tried contacting Australian contributors 
individually who haven't accepted or declined, and who haven't 
edited for a while.  These are the people who may not be engaged 
with the community any longer, and who actually may not know about 
the licence change.  Did you decline the licence change?  Because if 
you did, I'd have assumed that you knew about it and were aware of 
the discussion, and therefore didn't need to be contacted.


Thanks,
Ian.

On 31 March 2012 09:14, Richard Colless > wrote:


Thank you, John. I couldn't have expressed it better.

Throughout this whole sorry story, I have only ever received ONE
communication form OSM. It was a begging letter asking me to
reconsider. If not for the discussion of the forum, I would not
have even known about the licence change. AI think that shows
how much OSM cares about keeping contributors informed about
changes.

Richard

On 31/03/2012 7:43 AM, John Smith wrote:

On 31 March 2012 01:54, Grant
Slatermailto:openstreet...@firefishy.com>>  wrote:

Australian Decliners,

As a mapper, contributor and member of the project's
sysadmin team I
kindly ask you to please reconsider your declined
status. Time is
about to run out.

You and others didn't care about us, told us to go away as
we were
insignificant and our issue were unimportant and now you
come begging
for us to reconsider.

Perhaps the whole license issue should be reconsidered,
after all you
are the one throwing out the baby with the bath water, you are
choosing to do this, not us, perhaps you should choose to
call the
whole thing off.


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org 
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au





___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au




___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Plea to Australian decliners

[Simon Poole]

Richard

while IMHO communications in OSM and out of OSM leave much to desire, in
the case of the licence change there has been a substantial amount of
communication to the mappers. The only reason I can see for you -not-
getting a mail from the OSMF early on, is that you must have practically
immediately declined when that became possible. And I assume the
reasoning at that point in time was that as a decliner you were already
informed about the issues and didn't need the OSMF pointing out
something you already knew about.

Simon

Am 31.03.2012 04:59, schrieb Richard Colless:
> I did decline the new terms. And I was contacted, as I said, just
> once, by someone trying to persuade me to change my mind. My point was
> that OSM never  contacted me to say that a licence change was being
> considered. That is hardly the right way to go about making a major
> change to the system.
>
> I also take issue with this statement:
> Declining hurts fellow Australian mappers who have in good faith build
> data on-top of your contributions and will leave animosity between our
> projects.
> Don't try blaming decliners for the hurt to other mappers. If anyone
> built up on my edits, and their work gets deleted as a result, blame
> OSM, not the members who declined.
>
> Richard
>
>
> On 31/03/2012 12:36 PM, Ian Sergeant wrote:
>> Hi Richard,
>>
>> Like or loathe the licence change, and the manner it has been
>> pursued, sure.  But I really don't think anyone in OSM has tried to
>> keep the knowledge of the licence change quiet.  I think a fair few
>> people have been trying to get in touch with as many people as possible.
>>
>> I've personally tried contacting Australian contributors individually
>> who haven't accepted or declined, and who haven't edited for a
>> while.  These are the people who may not be engaged with the
>> community any longer, and who actually may not know about the licence
>> change.  Did you decline the licence change?  Because if you did, I'd
>> have assumed that you knew about it and were aware of the discussion,
>> and therefore didn't need to be contacted.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ian.
>>
>> On 31 March 2012 09:14, Richard Colless > > wrote:
>>
>> Thank you, John. I couldn't have expressed it better.
>>
>> Throughout this whole sorry story, I have only ever received ONE
>> communication form OSM. It was a begging letter asking me to
>> reconsider. If not for the discussion of the forum, I would not
>> have even known about the licence change. AI think that shows how
>> much OSM cares about keeping contributors informed about changes.
>>
>> Richard
>>
>> On 31/03/2012 7:43 AM, John Smith wrote:
>>
>> On 31 March 2012 01:54, Grant
>> Slater> >  wrote:
>>
>> Australian Decliners,
>>
>> As a mapper, contributor and member of the project's
>> sysadmin team I
>> kindly ask you to please reconsider your declined status.
>> Time is
>> about to run out.
>>
>> You and others didn't care about us, told us to go away as we
>> were
>> insignificant and our issue were unimportant and now you come
>> begging
>> for us to reconsider.
>>
>> Perhaps the whole license issue should be reconsidered, after
>> all you
>> are the one throwing out the baby with the bath water, you are
>> choosing to do this, not us, perhaps you should choose to
>> call the
>> whole thing off.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org 
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Plea to Australian decliners

[Ian Sergeant]

Hi Richard,

There are a couple of hundred thousand registered members of OSM, and much
effort has gone into contacting those who are genuinely out of touch.
There are around 25 Australian contributors who have declined, and all of
them are fairly significant contributors.  They went to the same site to
decline which had links to the information that the people who accepted
had.  I genuinely would have believed that those 25 people had access to
all the information that was available, and therefore thought extra direct
communication on this subject wasn't wanted by them.   I apologise if that
wasn't the case with you.

I'd be last to say that OSMF board and LWG has done everything right as
part of this licence change.  Even with making decisions over the past
couple of weeks to do with the changeover, I wouldn't say they have learned
too many lessons.  But these guys are volunteer mappers, hackers, etc,  not
necessarily PR experts or  communications specialists.   They have day
jobs, and maybe even real lives.  Dealing with remote communities and
disparate opinions is hard.   Even full time PR departments for large
corporations stuff this up on a regular basis.  There is no doubt in my
mind that ultimately their main motivation is having a cool map that people
can use in cool ways.  Just like me.

I accept a person of principle can decline.  I can see the reasons for
doing it.

However, it is also an option for them to now say that the point is now
made.

Thanks,
Ian.

On 31 March 2012 13:59, Richard Colless  wrote:

>  I did decline the new terms. And I was contacted, as I said, just once,
> by someone trying to persuade me to change my mind. My point was that OSM
> never  contacted me to say that a licence change was being considered. That
> is hardly the right way to go about making a major change to the system.
>
> I also take issue with this statement:
>
> Declining hurts fellow Australian mappers who have in good faith build
> data on-top of your contributions and will leave animosity between our
> projects.
>
> Don't try blaming decliners for the hurt to other mappers. If anyone built
> up on my edits, and their work gets deleted as a result, blame OSM, not the
> members who declined.
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> On 31/03/2012 12:36 PM, Ian Sergeant wrote:
>
> Hi Richard,
>
> Like or loathe the licence change, and the manner it has been pursued,
> sure.  But I really don't think anyone in OSM has tried to keep the
> knowledge of the licence change quiet.  I think a fair few people have been
> trying to get in touch with as many people as possible.
>
> I've personally tried contacting Australian contributors individually who
> haven't accepted or declined, and who haven't edited for a while.  These
> are the people who may not be engaged with the community any longer, and
> who actually may not know about the licence change.  Did you decline the
> licence change?  Because if you did, I'd have assumed that you knew about
> it and were aware of the discussion, and therefore didn't need to be
> contacted.
>
> Thanks,
> Ian.
>
> On 31 March 2012 09:14, Richard Colless  wrote:
>
>> Thank you, John. I couldn't have expressed it better.
>>
>> Throughout this whole sorry story, I have only ever received ONE
>> communication form OSM. It was a begging letter asking me to reconsider. If
>> not for the discussion of the forum, I would not have even known about the
>> licence change. AI think that shows how much OSM cares about keeping
>> contributors informed about changes.
>>
>> Richard
>>
>> On 31/03/2012 7:43 AM, John Smith wrote:
>>
>>> On 31 March 2012 01:54, Grant Slater
>>>  wrote:
>>>
 Australian Decliners,

 As a mapper, contributor and member of the project's sysadmin team I
 kindly ask you to please reconsider your declined status. Time is
 about to run out.

>>> You and others didn't care about us, told us to go away as we were
>>> insignificant and our issue were unimportant and now you come begging
>>> for us to reconsider.
>>>
>>> Perhaps the whole license issue should be reconsidered, after all you
>>> are the one throwing out the baby with the bath water, you are
>>> choosing to do this, not us, perhaps you should choose to call the
>>> whole thing off.
>>>
>>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Plea to Australian decliners

[Richard Colless]

I did decline the new terms. And I was contacted, as I said, just once, 
by someone trying to persuade me to change my mind. My point was that 
OSM never  contacted me to say that a licence change was being 
considered. That is hardly the right way to go about making a major 
change to the system.


I also take issue with this statement:

Declining hurts fellow Australian mappers who have in good faith build
data on-top of your contributions and will leave animosity between our
projects.

Don't try blaming decliners for the hurt to other mappers. If anyone 
built up on my edits, and their work gets deleted as a result, blame 
OSM, not the members who declined.


Richard


On 31/03/2012 12:36 PM, Ian Sergeant wrote:

Hi Richard,

Like or loathe the licence change, and the manner it has been pursued, 
sure.  But I really don't think anyone in OSM has tried to keep the 
knowledge of the licence change quiet.  I think a fair few people have 
been trying to get in touch with as many people as possible.


I've personally tried contacting Australian contributors individually 
who haven't accepted or declined, and who haven't edited for a while.  
These are the people who may not be engaged with the community any 
longer, and who actually may not know about the licence change.  Did 
you decline the licence change?  Because if you did, I'd have assumed 
that you knew about it and were aware of the discussion, and therefore 
didn't need to be contacted.


Thanks,
Ian.

On 31 March 2012 09:14, Richard Colless > wrote:


Thank you, John. I couldn't have expressed it better.

Throughout this whole sorry story, I have only ever received ONE
communication form OSM. It was a begging letter asking me to
reconsider. If not for the discussion of the forum, I would not
have even known about the licence change. AI think that shows how
much OSM cares about keeping contributors informed about changes.

Richard

On 31/03/2012 7:43 AM, John Smith wrote:

On 31 March 2012 01:54, Grant
Slatermailto:openstreet...@firefishy.com>>  wrote:

Australian Decliners,

As a mapper, contributor and member of the project's
sysadmin team I
kindly ask you to please reconsider your declined status.
Time is
about to run out.

You and others didn't care about us, told us to go away as we were
insignificant and our issue were unimportant and now you come
begging
for us to reconsider.

Perhaps the whole license issue should be reconsidered, after
all you
are the one throwing out the baby with the bath water, you are
choosing to do this, not us, perhaps you should choose to call the
whole thing off.


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org 
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Plea to Australian decliners

[Ian Sergeant]

Hi Richard,

Like or loathe the licence change, and the manner it has been pursued,
sure.  But I really don't think anyone in OSM has tried to keep the
knowledge of the licence change quiet.  I think a fair few people have been
trying to get in touch with as many people as possible.

I've personally tried contacting Australian contributors individually who
haven't accepted or declined, and who haven't edited for a while.  These
are the people who may not be engaged with the community any longer, and
who actually may not know about the licence change.  Did you decline the
licence change?  Because if you did, I'd have assumed that you knew about
it and were aware of the discussion, and therefore didn't need to be
contacted.

Thanks,
Ian.

On 31 March 2012 09:14, Richard Colless  wrote:

> Thank you, John. I couldn't have expressed it better.
>
> Throughout this whole sorry story, I have only ever received ONE
> communication form OSM. It was a begging letter asking me to reconsider. If
> not for the discussion of the forum, I would not have even known about the
> licence change. AI think that shows how much OSM cares about keeping
> contributors informed about changes.
>
> Richard
>
> On 31/03/2012 7:43 AM, John Smith wrote:
>
>> On 31 March 2012 01:54, Grant 
>> Slater>
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Australian Decliners,
>>>
>>> As a mapper, contributor and member of the project's sysadmin team I
>>> kindly ask you to please reconsider your declined status. Time is
>>> about to run out.
>>>
>> You and others didn't care about us, told us to go away as we were
>> insignificant and our issue were unimportant and now you come begging
>> for us to reconsider.
>>
>> Perhaps the whole license issue should be reconsidered, after all you
>> are the one throwing out the baby with the bath water, you are
>> choosing to do this, not us, perhaps you should choose to call the
>> whole thing off.
>>
>>
> __**_
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] [sharedmapau] Re: Plea to Australian decliners

[Richard Colless]

Thank you, John. I couldn't have expressed it better.

Throughout this whole sorry story, I have only ever received ONE 
communication form OSM. It was a begging letter asking me to reconsider. 
If not for the discussion of the forum, I would not have even known 
about the licence change. AI think that shows how much OSM cares about 
keeping contributors informed about changes.


Richard

On 31/03/2012 7:43 AM, John Smith wrote:

On 31 March 2012 01:54, Grant Slater  wrote:

Australian Decliners,

As a mapper, contributor and member of the project's sysadmin team I
kindly ask you to please reconsider your declined status. Time is
about to run out.

You and others didn't care about us, told us to go away as we were
insignificant and our issue were unimportant and now you come begging
for us to reconsider.

Perhaps the whole license issue should be reconsidered, after all you
are the one throwing out the baby with the bath water, you are
choosing to do this, not us, perhaps you should choose to call the
whole thing off.



___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au